The new edition of the New International Version translation of the Bible has caused a stir. The updated translation contains many changes so that it may be more politically correct. The questions must be prompted: Is this right? Did the inspired text in lend itself to be translated in this way? And is this simply the controversial Today’s New International Version in a new binding.
One must figure out if this is right by asking whether or not it is important to interpret the inspired word of God literally. If the one believes that the word of God must be plainly translated and void of any paraphrasing of the words used then the updated NIV would not cut it. Even the dim-witted scholar from The Daily Beast (Newsweek’s website) realizes this when they note:
“in the old translation, John the Baptist says ‘If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar.’ The NIV instead says ‘If anyone says ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother or sister, he is a liar.’ Over the years, NIV has been steadily trying to make the Bible more inclusive, including the previous translation in 2005 that changed many references from ‘he’ to ‘they.’”
Now, despite that fact that this is from John the Apostle, not John the Baptist, the writer makes note of the changes in the text to include everyone. Some say this is good and the Greek manuscripts lend themselves to be translated to include all of mankind (anthropos), according to Study Light’s Lexicon. However the updated NIV has made errors in the translation; it has taken the political correctness to an extreme and may be on the verge of imitating Thomas Jefferson with his damning version of the scriptures, in which he knifed out the words and passages he did not particularly agree with. The USA Today quotes Wayne Grudem saying that this new translation has “3,000 places where words such as ‘man,’ ‘father,’ ‘son,’ ‘brother’ and "he" vanished.” Any elementary Greek student knows that these words are not synonyms in the original manuscripts.
In all of this, one must simply ask themselves if this is just Zondervan (the writers of the NIV) just redoing the 2005 “politically correct” TNIV. Let’s look at the two textsside-by-side using The Daily Beast’s example (emphasis mine)
TNIV- “If we say we love God yet hate a brother or sister, we are liars. For if we do not love a fellow believer, whom we have seen, we cannot love God, whom we have not seen.”
NIV- “Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.”
As one can see both texts use the politically correct terminology of “brother or sister”; however the wording in them slightly differ.
So we have to ask is all this important, and to put it simply: YES. This is crucial because if we support a text that is not inspired; a text that is purposely changing the word of God to be more appealing to those in a sinful world, then a horrendous sin has been committed. Grudem makes note of this in his Systematic Theology (100).
So may the love of the text reside in the people of God, and may a holy anger and zeal burn within our hearts against those who mar the word of God, in order to make it more appealing to man.
